Teaching Philosophy:
When I was an undergraduate, some of my favorite religious studies courses confused me, but in a helpful way. How? Whether I was studying Judaism, Christian fundamentalism, mysticism, or popular culture, the academic exploration of religious communities and religious traditions felt both strange and familiar; that is, the study of religion and the religious allowed me to know more about the complex world around me and examine my own assumptions in an empowering classroom environment. The best religious studies professors I had, graduate and undergraduate, effectively anchoring course disorientation in scholarly methods and academic processes. For my students, I create a similar dual sense of freedom and structure, disorientation and reorientation.
An example of how I seek to empower students through disorientation can be seen in my overall approach to teaching. When I teach any course, I generally mix lectures and discussion opportunities. Well-designed discussions offer an important forum for students to confront difference in a supportive and challenging environment, encountering with complex primary and secondary sources and each other. If discussion sections are not possible, I hold a number of “workshops” throughout a semester. In some workshops, students encounter a primary text and we walk through analyzing it together. I use the hands-on opportunity of walking through a source as a means of introducing academic methods that force students to think about the material differently than they were perhaps used to previously.
As a concrete example, in “Introduction to Jewish Studies (JS-101),” the students, mostly first year undergraduates, read several short scholarly essays in a unit on ancient Jewish literature. Each of the essays examined biblical and Talmudic primary sources, though the authors had different academic questions in mind and applied varying methods. A preliminary assignment led the students through the process of deconstructing a scholarly argument, examining its assumptions, approach, data, and interpretation. Students then analyzed the primary sources for themselves, applying academic methodologies and constructing their own arguments in class. Students wrote reflection papers on their approach and conclusions. My multi-tiered process anchored students in a defined set of readings and approaches, all connected to a bound unit we had discussed in class for several weeks (Biblical and Talmudic literature). The short scholarly essays, chosen for clarity of language, approach, and argument, provided the students with models of academic processes that they later enacted themselves.
Disorientation has other positive results in classes like “Introduction to Jewish Studies.” Thanks to the scholarly essays and approaches I chose to highlight, classroom discussion avoided the insider-outsider problem—namely, between “heritage-learners” (Jewish) and “non-heritage-learners” (non-Jewish)—that is typical in introductory Jewish studies courses. The unit placed nearly every student in a position where they were required to “own” the primary sources they utilizing academic approaches they were not used to, thus challenging their assumptions about the material. This approach fostered a classroom environment where everyone could participate, regardless of background or exposure to the sources.
For disorientation to work effectively, students must have a solid base upon which to stand. I use key academic tasks, such as research, argumentation, paper presentations, scholarly critique, etc., as the solid base. One might still ask: how do you provide students a solid base when they have little academic context for performing these tasks? As above, I use instructional scaffolding to accomplish my course goals. For instance, I have taught several iterations of a course entitled “Holocaust Memoirs,” even as a senior seminar course for Jewish studies majors and religious studies majors. In the senior seminar, I designed course assignments around the final project—an eighteen to twenty-page seminar paper. When the students entered the course, they found the idea of such a long final paper daunting. In line with instructional scaffolding, however, students first learned how to deconstruct complex scholarly arguments and create their own through several small assignments and class workshops. Student read each others’ work at every turn and learned how to offer constructive feedback. Then, students turned in paper abstracts, a bibliography, and a research outline, all of which had been modeled for them in previous workshops. Students completed their final paper in stages, receiving extensive critique from each other and from myself. The final product was a much more refined, better-argued final paper, one in which they learned important academic skills through firsthand experience.
In another religious studies course, entitled “Popular Culture and the American Jewish Experience,” I devoted each week to separate aspects of the Jewish experience with American popular culture. My undergraduates not only appreciated the use of music, television, film, novels, and more, but also valued the numerous issues that could be highlighted through popular media, like Americanization, Zionism, Yiddish culture, Diaspora, and Hasidism in America. The final assignment, a 12-page paper, allowed each student to explore a single primary source of his or her personal choice and then “read” the source closely. Again, students initially found such freedom daunting. However, smaller writing assignments built upon each other, such that the final paper was the end goal. Students constructed a substantial bibliography and throughout the semester wrote 2-page analysis papers on their source material. At each stage, they received significant feedback from their peers and myself. Looking at popular culture through scholarly lenses was indeed disorienting for them, but the academic rigor and modeling process provided a key anchor for their new encounter with popular culture.
To reiterate, my teaching emphasizes semester-long goals for students, relying on instructional scaffolding. The philosophy behind my approach is keen on enabling students to take ownership over academic tasks, including research, drafting, critique, revising, and resubmitting. For all students, from first-years to upper-level undergraduates, my courses encouraged levels of freedom, creativity, critical thinking, project execution, and scholarly writing that are reflective of scholarship. Students generally responded well to the combination of freedom with normative academic tasks.
When I was an undergraduate, some of my favorite religious studies courses confused me, but in a helpful way. How? Whether I was studying Judaism, Christian fundamentalism, mysticism, or popular culture, the academic exploration of religious communities and religious traditions felt both strange and familiar; that is, the study of religion and the religious allowed me to know more about the complex world around me and examine my own assumptions in an empowering classroom environment. The best religious studies professors I had, graduate and undergraduate, effectively anchoring course disorientation in scholarly methods and academic processes. For my students, I create a similar dual sense of freedom and structure, disorientation and reorientation.
An example of how I seek to empower students through disorientation can be seen in my overall approach to teaching. When I teach any course, I generally mix lectures and discussion opportunities. Well-designed discussions offer an important forum for students to confront difference in a supportive and challenging environment, encountering with complex primary and secondary sources and each other. If discussion sections are not possible, I hold a number of “workshops” throughout a semester. In some workshops, students encounter a primary text and we walk through analyzing it together. I use the hands-on opportunity of walking through a source as a means of introducing academic methods that force students to think about the material differently than they were perhaps used to previously.
As a concrete example, in “Introduction to Jewish Studies (JS-101),” the students, mostly first year undergraduates, read several short scholarly essays in a unit on ancient Jewish literature. Each of the essays examined biblical and Talmudic primary sources, though the authors had different academic questions in mind and applied varying methods. A preliminary assignment led the students through the process of deconstructing a scholarly argument, examining its assumptions, approach, data, and interpretation. Students then analyzed the primary sources for themselves, applying academic methodologies and constructing their own arguments in class. Students wrote reflection papers on their approach and conclusions. My multi-tiered process anchored students in a defined set of readings and approaches, all connected to a bound unit we had discussed in class for several weeks (Biblical and Talmudic literature). The short scholarly essays, chosen for clarity of language, approach, and argument, provided the students with models of academic processes that they later enacted themselves.
Disorientation has other positive results in classes like “Introduction to Jewish Studies.” Thanks to the scholarly essays and approaches I chose to highlight, classroom discussion avoided the insider-outsider problem—namely, between “heritage-learners” (Jewish) and “non-heritage-learners” (non-Jewish)—that is typical in introductory Jewish studies courses. The unit placed nearly every student in a position where they were required to “own” the primary sources they utilizing academic approaches they were not used to, thus challenging their assumptions about the material. This approach fostered a classroom environment where everyone could participate, regardless of background or exposure to the sources.
For disorientation to work effectively, students must have a solid base upon which to stand. I use key academic tasks, such as research, argumentation, paper presentations, scholarly critique, etc., as the solid base. One might still ask: how do you provide students a solid base when they have little academic context for performing these tasks? As above, I use instructional scaffolding to accomplish my course goals. For instance, I have taught several iterations of a course entitled “Holocaust Memoirs,” even as a senior seminar course for Jewish studies majors and religious studies majors. In the senior seminar, I designed course assignments around the final project—an eighteen to twenty-page seminar paper. When the students entered the course, they found the idea of such a long final paper daunting. In line with instructional scaffolding, however, students first learned how to deconstruct complex scholarly arguments and create their own through several small assignments and class workshops. Student read each others’ work at every turn and learned how to offer constructive feedback. Then, students turned in paper abstracts, a bibliography, and a research outline, all of which had been modeled for them in previous workshops. Students completed their final paper in stages, receiving extensive critique from each other and from myself. The final product was a much more refined, better-argued final paper, one in which they learned important academic skills through firsthand experience.
In another religious studies course, entitled “Popular Culture and the American Jewish Experience,” I devoted each week to separate aspects of the Jewish experience with American popular culture. My undergraduates not only appreciated the use of music, television, film, novels, and more, but also valued the numerous issues that could be highlighted through popular media, like Americanization, Zionism, Yiddish culture, Diaspora, and Hasidism in America. The final assignment, a 12-page paper, allowed each student to explore a single primary source of his or her personal choice and then “read” the source closely. Again, students initially found such freedom daunting. However, smaller writing assignments built upon each other, such that the final paper was the end goal. Students constructed a substantial bibliography and throughout the semester wrote 2-page analysis papers on their source material. At each stage, they received significant feedback from their peers and myself. Looking at popular culture through scholarly lenses was indeed disorienting for them, but the academic rigor and modeling process provided a key anchor for their new encounter with popular culture.
To reiterate, my teaching emphasizes semester-long goals for students, relying on instructional scaffolding. The philosophy behind my approach is keen on enabling students to take ownership over academic tasks, including research, drafting, critique, revising, and resubmitting. For all students, from first-years to upper-level undergraduates, my courses encouraged levels of freedom, creativity, critical thinking, project execution, and scholarly writing that are reflective of scholarship. Students generally responded well to the combination of freedom with normative academic tasks.
Below are some of my example teaching materials, such as syllabi and assignments. Many of the assignments and syllabi I have used in the classroom, although some of the syllabi are for courses I hope to teach in the future. Please visit the contact page to inquire about any of these materials or the courses I have taught.
Example Syllabus Jewish Studies 101 | |
File Size: | 362 kb |
File Type: | docx |
Example Syllabus: Radicals, Rabbis, and Everything In-Between: American Jewish Literature, 1880s-1930s | |
File Size: | 572 kb |
File Type: | docx |
Example Syllabus: Religion 270, Introduction to Theories and Methods in Religious Studies | |
File Size: | 235 kb |
File Type: | docx |
Example Syllabus: Jewish Studies 190/REL 120: Freshman Seminar: Memoirs of the Holocaust | |
File Size: | 52 kb |
File Type: | docx |
Example Syllabus History of the Holocaust Rel 324/JS 324/Hist 385 | |
File Size: | 156 kb |
File Type: | docx |
Example Syllabus: REL 490: Advanced Theories and Methods RS 490 | |
File Size: | 223 kb |
File Type: | docx |
Example Syllabus Graduate Course Transnational Religion and America | |
File Size: | 965 kb |
File Type: | docx |
Example Assignment: Jewish Studies Senior Seminar: Memory, History, and Memoirs | |
File Size: | 149 kb |
File Type: | docx |
Example Assignment: Jewish Studies 101, Home-Diaspora, Writing Assignment | |
File Size: | 132 kb |
File Type: | docx |